Prince Andrew in the spotlight after Ghislaine Maxwell’s conviction | Local News

Maxwell chose not to testify in his own trial, saying there was “no need” since the prosecution had “failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.” As a result, she was not cross-examined on her friendship with Andrew.

However, there is no guarantee that she will not take a stand in a planned appeal of her conviction – or if the civil case against Andrew goes to court. She could also choose to cooperate with authorities – giving them any potentially incriminating information she may have about others – with the aim of reducing her sentence, legal experts have said.

“Maxwell may now have more to say on the whole matter, following his conviction,” Nick Goldstone, UK-based dispute resolution manager at international law firm Ince, told CNN, although the discussions may “take a while to unfold”. he added.

“If Maxwell has information and incriminating evidence regarding Prince Andrew or anyone else who has participated in unlawful behavior in association with Jeffrey Epstein, then I think the Prince and everyone else might have a lot to fear from a sentence negotiation process, ”Goldstone in an email.

“On the other hand, if Prince Andrew has done nothing wrong, he should have nothing to fear from Maxwell’s sentence bargaining.”

But, Gerry said, Andrew might have reason to be concerned if there was a sentence negotiation in Maxwell’s case.

“A sentence negotiation can take place if she decides to give or has given information,” Gerry said. “It could involve many people, including Prince Andrew. She certainly has nothing to lose now that she faces significant sentence.”

Defendants have the most leverage to cooperate before being charged, and that’s how they come to favorable plea negotiations, CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin said.

“But it is possible in certain circumstances to cooperate after conviction, although (Maxwell) will have a lot less influence now,” he said.

“I suspect she will want to do whatever she can to reduce her sentence and cooperation is the only option now. Of course, that depends on what information she has.”

The government would of course be interested if she had compromising information about Andrew, Toobin said – but there is no reason to assume she does, he added, and Andrew has denied any improper conduct.

“Now that she has been sentenced, she is a less valuable witness for the prosecution because she can be more easily discredited as someone who is simply trying to reduce her sentence,” Toobin said.

Giuffre: Maxwell did not act alone

Giuffre was not called as a prosecution or defense witness in Maxwell’s trial, but his name was mentioned several times in court.

Lawyers acting for Giuffre welcomed Maxwell’s conviction in a statement Wednesday evening. “This is a great day for justice and for the survivors of Maxwell. The jury’s verdict justifies the courage and commitment of our clients who have stood up against thick and thin for many years to bring Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell to justice in court, “said US lawyer David. Boys.

“They did not and could not have acted alone. The scope, scale and duration of their sex trafficking crimes depend on many wealthy and powerful collaborators and co-conspirators. They, too, are not in control. above the law. “

“I hope today is not the end but rather another step in justice. Maxwell did not act alone. Others must be held accountable. I trust they will be held accountable.” she tweeted.

One of Maxwell’s accusers, who went under the pseudonym “Kate” during the trial, said during the socialite’s trial that she was reluctant to withdraw from all contact with Maxwell and Epstein “because I saw how close they were both and I was scared “.

“Kate” said she used to hear Maxwell tell her about the socialite’s friends Prince Andrew and Donald Trump.

It’s no secret that Maxwell, the daughter of Czech-born press mogul and former British lawmaker Robert Maxwell, who died under mysterious circumstances in 1991, has been in exclusive circles in Britain and the States. -United.

A now infamous photo appears to show the prince with his arm around Giuffre’s waist, then Virginia Roberts, with Maxwell in the background.

In a BBC interview in November 2019, Andrew said he did not recall meeting Giuffre and suggested that a photo of the two of them may have been tampered with.

Legal battle

Prince Andrew’s lawyers fought fiercely to have the case against him dismissed. On Tuesday, they said the US court in the civil lawsuit filed by Giuffre in August was not competent to hear the case.

A petition filed with the US District Court in Manhattan states: “Ms. Giuffre alleges that she is a citizen of the state of Colorado, the evidence shows that she is actually domiciled in Australia, where she lived for almost two of the ten – last nine years. years. “The case also asks the court to” order Ms. Giuffre to respond to targeted written communications requests regarding her home and to submit to a two-hour remote testimony limited to her home issue. “

Goldstone told CNN that the outcome and timing of the Maxwell case seemed unnecessary to Andrew.

“Obviously, Maxwell’s verdicts are potentially very bad news for Prince Andrew, especially as they come just after his latest tactical decision to make a very technical argument over the New Court’s lack of jurisdiction. York to hear Ms Giuffre’s claim on the basis of her nationality and current residence, ”he said via email.

“I think there is no doubt that Ms Giuffre was a U.S. citizen at the time of the alleged incidents, which are the subject of her complaint against the Prince, regardless of her current usual place of residence.”

CNN has contacted attorneys for Virginia Roberts Giuffre and Prince Andrew for comment.

Goldstone said it would be “interesting to see what substantial defense Prince Andrew has against Giuffre’s claims, because all that has been put forward so far are technical and evasive positions.”

In an earlier motion to dismiss filed Oct. 29, a lawyer for Andrew said he “unequivocally denies Giuffre’s false allegations against him.”

What happened in Maxwell’s trial?

Maxwell, 60, was convicted in a New York federal court of five counts: sex trafficking of a minor, transporting a minor with intent to engage in criminal sexual activity and three counts related charges of conspiracy. She was acquitted of the charge of instigating a minor to travel to engage in unlawful sexual acts.

A sentencing date has not yet been set.

Prosecutors argued that Maxwell and Epstein conspired to set up a scheme to lure young girls into sex with Epstein from 1994 to 2004 in New York City, Florida, New Mexico and the US Virgin Islands. . Four women testified during the trial that Epstein abused them and that Maxwell facilitated and sometimes participated in the abuse.

Her defense, meanwhile, said she was a “scapegoat” for Epstein’s actions and attacked the memories and motivations of women who say they were sexually abused.

Maxwell’s lawyers are working on an appeal, lawyer Bobbi C. Sternheim said.

“We strongly believe in the innocence of Ghislaine. Obviously, we are very disappointed with the verdict,” Sternheim said outside the courthouse on Wednesday, adding that his team believed Maxwell would still be justified.

Maxwell’s family have pledged their continued support after the guilty verdict.

“We strongly believe in the innocence of our sister – we are very disappointed with the verdict. We have already launched the appeal tonight and we believe it will ultimately be justified,” a statement from the family said.